Reputation
3,333
Top tag
Next privilege 5,000 Rep.
Approve tag wiki edits
Badges
1 10 23
Newest
 Nice Answer
Impact
~307k people reached

Apr
23
comment SSL certificates for domain without www
@Motivated No, it's not different, they do call it SAN in their article too.
Apr
22
comment SSL certificates for domain without www
@Motivated Not sure what you mean. I've clearly mentioned this "Some certificates can be valid for multiple host names, by having multiple Subject Alternative Name (SAN) DNS entries, e.g. domain.com and www.domain.com. Some CAs do this by default, some do it for an extra fee."
Mar
2
awarded  Nice Answer
Feb
23
awarded  Popular Question
Aug
20
awarded  Autobiographer
Jul
2
awarded  Enlightened
Jul
2
awarded  Nice Answer
Jun
30
awarded  Yearling
Jun
23
comment View the SSL certificate of a page that immediately redirects to another
If the server uses SNI, you should add -servername foo.example.com to the s_client options.
Apr
8
awarded  Good Answer
Mar
3
comment How to install a vulnerable version of OpenSSL on a Linux server?
In general, a good way to test older versions and Linux distributions is to download older ISO images of the distribution, and possibly install a VM using it. Not all packages are available in this, but OpenSSL would certainly be.
Dec
1
comment Is STARTTLS more safe than TLS/SSL?
There are RFCs about TLS (RFC 5246 and predecessors), PKI (RFC 5280), name verification (RFC 6125), but nothing to describe the interaction between SMTP and SSL/TLS in SMTPS officially AFAIK, not in the same way as you get a spec for HTTPS: RFC 2818. One may say "it's obvious, just establish the SSL/TLS connection first", but not everything about it is that obvious (in particular the identity verification aspect, only formalised quite recently in RFC 6125).
Dec
1
comment Is STARTTLS more safe than TLS/SSL?
Your point is certainly valid, but by lack of any RFC or official specification regarding SMTPS (i.e. SMTP + "implicit SSL/TLS" where SSL/TLS is established first), SMTP/SMTPS clients could also decide to fall back to a plain connection if they can't manage to initiate an SSL/TLS connection on port 465. That's still purely an implementation choice.
Nov
30
comment Is STARTTLS more safe than TLS/SSL?
@Greg (Note that "explicit TLS" often refers to STARTTLS, as opposed to implicit TLS where you establish the SSL/TLS connection beforehand). A client trying to do implicit TLS could also be badly implemented and send the data over plain TCP in the same way (for example by having an "SSL" tick box that doesn't actually do anything). Many other mistakes can be made in the implementation (like no proper identity verification). Both can be implemented as badly as you want, that doesn't mean the mechanism itself is less secure.
Nov
28
comment Is STARTTLS more safe than TLS/SSL?
@Greg you're getting confused with opportunistic use of STARTTLS between MTAs. The problem here is the "opportunistic" use of SSL/TLS not whether it's upfront or upgraded. SSL/TLS between MTAs is a whole different issue that doesn't really have much to do with explicit or implicit SSL/TLS, but that has to do with the fact MTAs can't know whether to expect other MTAs to support SSL/TLS at all (and also certificate management).
Nov
28
comment Is STARTTLS more safe than TLS/SSL?
@Greg I'm not planning to repeat what I've said in answers here and here, but STARTTLS isn't less secure. It's only less secure if the client is badly implemented (i.e. it's not a protocol or conceptual problem, but an implementation issue, as it was the case in Thunderbird up to 2010).
Sep
30
awarded  Explainer
Aug
31
awarded  Nice Answer
Jul
22
comment What types of systems have to “scale up” rather than “scale out”?
@LieRyan This depends heavily on the application (I don't just mean how the software was implemented, but also what it's meant to do). There are indeed distributed database systems, however they tend to have to make compromises in terms of ACID compliance. They may perform better for certain types of queries but not as well for others.
Jul
22
comment Isn't Ctrl-Alt-Delete on Linux *really* dangerous?
I've had the opposite problem once. I was logged on remotely to a server from a desktop machine, and wanted to reboot the desktop machine. I typed shutdown -r now only to realise, I was in the wrong window or forgot to log out from the server first... I wish I had used Ctrl+Alt+Del. (Of course, this doesn't necessarily apply to your case, since you seem to be concerned with disabling it on servers.)